Sydney Roosters Nick Politis blasts NRL draw

[Sart0ri]

Nick has a point, a draw should be random. Even counting the first 2 rounds seems strange if you are changing the "draw" and the number of refs.

It all seems a bit rushed and arbitrary at the moment.

 

[gallagher]

Nick has a point, a draw should be random. Even counting the first 2 rounds seems strange if you are changing the "draw" and the number of refs.

It all seems a bit rushed and arbitrary at the moment.

Pleasing the broadcasters comes before fairness.

 

[Fade.To.Black]

Nick has a point, a draw should be random. Even counting the first 2 rounds seems strange if you are changing the "draw" and the number of refs.

It all seems a bit rushed and arbitrary at the moment.

Pleasing the broadcasters comes before fairness.

As the Broncos can attest to.

 

[Fade.To.Black]

He has no idea. As the team that finished first last year, a fair system requires that you receive the hardest draw this year.

That is not a fair system. A fair system requires that all teams have an equally hard draw not the most successful team gets the hardest draw. All teams should be on an equal footing and the best team wins. You are talking about a handicap system and I cant agree with that.

It would be impossible to get a dead-even draw for all teams, some will have a harder draw just by the way the comp is structured ie: not playing every team twice (once at home and once away).
@nrlsurvivor has the fairest method to accommodate this.....the top teams from the year before should have a harder draw instead of the perennial cellar-dwellers copping the rough end every season.

 

[Cairnstigers]

Sydney Roosters chairman Nick Politis blasts NRL draw
Marc ChurchesBy Marc Churches
an hour ago

Sydney Roosters chairman Nick Politis has blasted the NRL's revamped draw, declaring it's **unfair** and nothing but a "TV schedule."

Already sitting at 0-2, the Roosters' bid for a three-peat was dealt a huge blow with the reigning champions handed arguably the most difficult draw in the competition. Under the revised 20-round draw, the Roosters will face the Storm, Raiders, Rabbitohs and Broncos twice - clubs who all featured in last year's finals series.

Responding to his club's fixture, Politis said he's now banned the word "draw" from being used within his club while also taking aim at the integrity of the competition. "It's not a draw – it's a TV schedule," Politis told Fox Sports. "A draw is when you've got **fairness**. I've told (Roosters CEO) Joe Kelly we're banned from using the word draw. "I've been bringing this up at the chairmans' meeting for the last couple of years now. "What's next? We've had the rule changes, the referees, next thing they'll tell us we can only take the field with 12 players."

After it was announced the premiership table would remain the same and teams would keep their points, the Roosters chairman slammed the decision and said it would be "meaningless" and difficult for some sides to make the top four. "If you change the draw, you've got to start again. If the current points are to stand, we have to play over a full season," Politis said back in April.

"It's like changing the race from a Melbourne Cup (two miles) to a Doncaster (one mile) after it's already started. "It becomes meaningless and makes it almost mathematically impossible for the bottom sides to make the top four. "This isn't just about the Roosters. It's about the **integrity** of the competition and giving every club and their fans a **fair** chance."

You want to use these words now you flog
What about the last few years
What about the 6 again call that won you last years final
What about the fact you have a team stacked with Australian and New Zealand players
Stop your complaining and get on with it
Look at the draw you got in 2018

2018
WINNERS

Roosters

Make no mistake, the Roosters have been kissed on the bum by a rainbow by the NRL with this draw.

Already with the advantage of adding gun fullback James Tedesco to an already strong roster and heading the queue for the services of Cooper Cronk, the Chooks have parlayed their good fortune into the easiest draw in the competition.

The Roosters play against fellow top four opponents just four times all season (the second least) and play against bottom four sides more often than anyone else. Literally a third of their 24 games are against the basement battlers of 2017

Now look at the Tigers

Wests Tigers 2018 Draw

After a series of poor seasons, Tigers fans could be excused for wondering when things are going to go their way.

With a new-look side that will still be adapting to life after Aaron Woods and James Tedesco, the Tigers are staring down the barrel of a 2018 that ends before it begins.

In the first four rounds they play each of the sides who filled out the 2017 top four at the end of the regular season.

By round five they will have already played reigning premiers and renowned fast starters the Melbourne Storm twice.

They play rising power Parramatta for the second time in round eight and even their round seven clash — a ‘home’ game in Tamworth against Newcastle is tougher than it could have been.

It’s not without possibility that the Tigers could open the season at 0-8, taking their playoffs hopes away from them before they can blink


so politis you bum
You have nothing to complain about

 

[Tiger5150]

He has no idea. As the team that finished first last year, a fair system requires that you receive the hardest draw this year.

That is not a fair system. A fair system requires that all teams have an equally hard draw not the most successful team gets the hardest draw. All teams should be on an equal footing and the best team wins. You are talking about a handicap system and I cant agree with that.

It would be impossible to get a dead-even draw for all teams, some will have a harder draw just by the way the comp is structured ie: not playing every team twice (once at home and once away).
@nrlsurvivor has the fairest method to accommodate this.....the top teams from the year before should have a harder draw instead of the perennial cellar-dwellers copping the rough end every season.

I disagree totally. Every season is a new season, we should not have handicapping. The NRL should be the best of the best and not influenced by handicapping. What happens to the team that wins the comp then loses its 8 best players, is that still fair? Why should a team who has invested the most money, best resources, best training, best people, best training techniques be handicapped so that an incompetent club gets a hand up?

It should be as even a playing field as possible. I agree with you that unless all clubs play each other twice, the draw cant be completely fair, but to intentionally make it unfair is wrong. IMO the system the NRL used prior to COVID where the results of the previous system were split into two pools was the fairest, so 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 were in one pool and all played each other twice and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 were in the other and played each other twice. That is as fair as it can be. Equality, not equity.

 

[the_third]

Funny he thinks about the top 4, not the top 8. That’s what we need to aspire to.

Exactly right mate

 

[sheer64]

It now means he will have to pay the refs more. Expect most of the refs to be driving new cars by years end!

 

[momo_amp_medo]

NRL have a new favourite toy but it’s an eel and not a rooster or a rabbit.

 

[Wildcat777]

Not the first word uncle nick has banned. The other was cap. He just says salary...

 

[Fade.To.Black]

He has no idea. As the team that finished first last year, a fair system requires that you receive the hardest draw this year.

That is not a fair system. A fair system requires that all teams have an equally hard draw not the most successful team gets the hardest draw. All teams should be on an equal footing and the best team wins. You are talking about a handicap system and I cant agree with that.

It would be impossible to get a dead-even draw for all teams, some will have a harder draw just by the way the comp is structured ie: not playing every team twice (once at home and once away).
@nrlsurvivor has the fairest method to accommodate this.....the top teams from the year before should have a harder draw instead of the perennial cellar-dwellers copping the rough end every season.


I disagree totally. Every season is a new season, we should not have handicapping. The NRL should be the best of the best and not influenced by handicapping. What happens to the team that wins the comp then loses its 8 best players, is that still fair? Why should a team who has invested the most money, best resources, best training, best people, best training techniques be handicapped so that an incompetent club gets a hand up?

It should be as even a playing field as possible. I agree with you that unless all clubs play each other twice, the draw cant be completely fair, but to intentionally make it unfair is wrong. IMO the system the NRL used prior to COVID where the results of the previous system were split into two pools was the fairest, so 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 were in one pool and all played each other twice and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 were in the other and played each other twice. That is as fair as it can be. Equality, not equity.

"The team that has invested the most money"......aren't all clubs restricted by the salary cap on their spending? As is widely suspected, teams that spend the most money are most than likely paying star players outside of the allowed cap with "extras". Should they be rewarded for that? Look at professional sports where there is a player draft in place, the team that finishes last gets the 1st draft pick and so-on up the ladder in reverse. Doing things this way gives the best chance of a closer comp.
Or we can just go the way of the EPL where only 3 or 4 clubs are capable of competing realistically for the title every year. I know which comp version I would rather watch.

 

[Tiger5150]

He has no idea. As the team that finished first last year, a fair system requires that you receive the hardest draw this year.

That is not a fair system. A fair system requires that all teams have an equally hard draw not the most successful team gets the hardest draw. All teams should be on an equal footing and the best team wins. You are talking about a handicap system and I cant agree with that.

It would be impossible to get a dead-even draw for all teams, some will have a harder draw just by the way the comp is structured ie: not playing every team twice (once at home and once away).
@nrlsurvivor has the fairest method to accommodate this.....the top teams from the year before should have a harder draw instead of the perennial cellar-dwellers copping the rough end every season.


I disagree totally. Every season is a new season, we should not have handicapping. The NRL should be the best of the best and not influenced by handicapping. What happens to the team that wins the comp then loses its 8 best players, is that still fair? Why should a team who has invested the most money, best resources, best training, best people, best training techniques be handicapped so that an incompetent club gets a hand up?

It should be as even a playing field as possible. I agree with you that unless all clubs play each other twice, the draw cant be completely fair, but to intentionally make it unfair is wrong. IMO the system the NRL used prior to COVID where the results of the previous system were split into two pools was the fairest, so 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 were in one pool and all played each other twice and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 were in the other and played each other twice. That is as fair as it can be. Equality, not equity.

"The team that has invested the most money"......aren't all clubs restricted by the salary cap on their spending? As is widely suspected, teams that spend the most money are most than likely paying star players outside of the allowed cap with "extras". Should they be rewarded for that? Look at professional sports where there is a player draft in place, the team that finishes last gets the 1st draft pick and so-on up the ladder in reverse. Doing things this way gives the best chance of a closer comp.
Or we can just go the way of the EPL where only 3 or 4 clubs are capable of competing realistically for the title every year. I know which comp version I would rather watch.

Clubs spend money on more than players, training staff, equipment, facilities, juniors, junior facilities, junior coaching, coaching staff, training of staff. Clubs that invest in these things and run a good ship should be rewarded, not handicapped. Why should a club that does these things well be handicapped and club that is run ineptly benefitted?

Also under the handicap system that you suggest you would have teams tanking and racing to the bottom from 6 weeks out.

So what kind of comp would I like to watch? A comp where teams are penalised for success, where teams are rewarded for mediocrity and poor performance, where teams are tanking in a race to the bottom and potentially my team is handicapped and not given the same opportunity as others?No thanks not that comp.

 

[diedpretty]

He has no idea. As the team that finished first last year, a fair system requires that you receive the hardest draw this year.

That is not a fair system. A fair system requires that all teams have an equally hard draw not the most successful team gets the hardest draw. All teams should be on an equal footing and the best team wins. You are talking about a handicap system and I cant agree with that.

It would be impossible to get a dead-even draw for all teams, some will have a harder draw just by the way the comp is structured ie: not playing every team twice (once at home and once away).
@nrlsurvivor has the fairest method to accommodate this.....the top teams from the year before should have a harder draw instead of the perennial cellar-dwellers copping the rough end every season.


I disagree totally. Every season is a new season, we should not have handicapping. The NRL should be the best of the best and not influenced by handicapping. What happens to the team that wins the comp then loses its 8 best players, is that still fair? Why should a team who has invested the most money, best resources, best training, best people, best training techniques be handicapped so that an incompetent club gets a hand up?

It should be as even a playing field as possible. I agree with you that unless all clubs play each other twice, the draw cant be completely fair, but to intentionally make it unfair is wrong. IMO the system the NRL used prior to COVID where the results of the previous system were split into two pools was the fairest, so 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 were in one pool and all played each other twice and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 were in the other and played each other twice. That is as fair as it can be. Equality, not equity.

"The team that has invested the most money"......aren't all clubs restricted by the salary cap on their spending? As is widely suspected, teams that spend the most money are most than likely paying star players outside of the allowed cap with "extras". Should they be rewarded for that? Look at professional sports where there is a player draft in place, the team that finishes last gets the 1st draft pick and so-on up the ladder in reverse. Doing things this way gives the best chance of a closer comp.
Or we can just go the way of the EPL where only 3 or 4 clubs are capable of competing realistically for the title every year. I know which comp version I would rather watch.

Clubs spend money on more than players, training staff, equipment, facilities, juniors, junior facilities, junior coaching, coaching staff, training of staff. Clubs that invest in these things and run a good ship should be rewarded, not handicapped. Why should a club that does these things well be handicapped and club that is run ineptly benefitted?

Also under the handicap system that you suggest you would have teams tanking and racing to the bottom from 6 weeks out.

So what kind of comp would I like to watch? A comp where teams are penalised for success, where teams are rewarded for mediocrity and poor performance, where teams are tanking in a race to the bottom and potentially my team is handicapped and not given the same opportunity as others?No thanks not that comp.

I think you will find a lot of those ancillaries are also capped - as for juniors - why should a club that has no juniors be allowed to go and pick the crop of other clubs juniors. You seem to want your cake and eat it too.

 

[Tiger5150]

He has no idea. As the team that finished first last year, a fair system requires that you receive the hardest draw this year.

That is not a fair system. A fair system requires that all teams have an equally hard draw not the most successful team gets the hardest draw. All teams should be on an equal footing and the best team wins. You are talking about a handicap system and I cant agree with that.

It would be impossible to get a dead-even draw for all teams, some will have a harder draw just by the way the comp is structured ie: not playing every team twice (once at home and once away).
@nrlsurvivor has the fairest method to accommodate this.....the top teams from the year before should have a harder draw instead of the perennial cellar-dwellers copping the rough end every season.


I disagree totally. Every season is a new season, we should not have handicapping. The NRL should be the best of the best and not influenced by handicapping. What happens to the team that wins the comp then loses its 8 best players, is that still fair? Why should a team who has invested the most money, best resources, best training, best people, best training techniques be handicapped so that an incompetent club gets a hand up?

It should be as even a playing field as possible. I agree with you that unless all clubs play each other twice, the draw cant be completely fair, but to intentionally make it unfair is wrong. IMO the system the NRL used prior to COVID where the results of the previous system were split into two pools was the fairest, so 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 were in one pool and all played each other twice and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 were in the other and played each other twice. That is as fair as it can be. Equality, not equity.

"The team that has invested the most money"......aren't all clubs restricted by the salary cap on their spending? As is widely suspected, teams that spend the most money are most than likely paying star players outside of the allowed cap with "extras". Should they be rewarded for that? Look at professional sports where there is a player draft in place, the team that finishes last gets the 1st draft pick and so-on up the ladder in reverse. Doing things this way gives the best chance of a closer comp.
Or we can just go the way of the EPL where only 3 or 4 clubs are capable of competing realistically for the title every year. I know which comp version I would rather watch.

Clubs spend money on more than players, training staff, equipment, facilities, juniors, junior facilities, junior coaching, coaching staff, training of staff. Clubs that invest in these things and run a good ship should be rewarded, not handicapped. Why should a club that does these things well be handicapped and club that is run ineptly benefitted?

Also under the handicap system that you suggest you would have teams tanking and racing to the bottom from 6 weeks out.

So what kind of comp would I like to watch? A comp where teams are penalised for success, where teams are rewarded for mediocrity and poor performance, where teams are tanking in a race to the bottom and potentially my team is handicapped and not given the same opportunity as others?No thanks not that comp.

I think you will find a lot of those ancillaries are also capped - as for juniors - why should a club that has no juniors be allowed to go and pick the crop of other clubs juniors. You seem to want your cake and eat it too.

I dont "want" anything, Im just arguing against a rigged draw, it should be as equal as possible and give all clubs an even platform and not penalise success.

If a club has not spent money on developing junior competitions and therefore has no juniors, if they go and "pick the crop" of other clubs juniors, they have to pay the top dollar for them and this gets picked up in the salary cap. If a club runs their club and juniors effectively, they foster juniors coming through and get first crack at them. Cant see a negative.

Again, I am merely arguing that the draw should be equal, not equitable.

 

[Red88_Tiger]

The squeeky wheel gets the oil. Nick is just lubricating the direct line to nrl hq. He's got to start over now toddys gone

 

[happy_tiger]

Sydney Roosters chairman Nick Politis blasts NRL draw
Marc ChurchesBy Marc Churches
an hour ago

Sydney Roosters chairman Nick Politis has blasted the NRL's revamped draw, declaring it's unfair and nothing but a "TV schedule."

Already sitting at 0-2, the Roosters' bid for a three-peat was dealt a huge blow with the reigning champions handed arguably the most difficult draw in the competition. Under the revised 20-round draw, the Roosters will face the Storm, Raiders, Rabbitohs and Broncos twice - clubs who all featured in last year's finals series.

Responding to his club's fixture, Politis said he's now banned the word "draw" from being used within his club while also taking aim at the integrity of the competition. "It's not a draw – it's a TV schedule," Politis told Fox Sports. "A draw is when you've got fairness. I've told (Roosters CEO) Joe Kelly we're banned from using the word draw. "I've been bringing this up at the chairmans' meeting for the last couple of years now. "What's next? We've had the rule changes, the referees, next thing they'll tell us we can only take the field with 12 players."

After it was announced the premiership table would remain the same and teams would keep their points, the Roosters chairman slammed the decision and said it would be "meaningless" and difficult for some sides to make the top four. "If you change the draw, you've got to start again. If the current points are to stand, we have to play over a full season," Politis said back in April.

"It's like changing the race from a Melbourne Cup (two miles) to a Doncaster (one mile) after it's already started. "It becomes meaningless and makes it almost mathematically impossible for the bottom sides to make the top four. "This isn't just about the Roosters. It's about the integrity of the competition and giving every club and their fans a fair chance."

Sorry Nick ...you didn't get the memo ...your only fielding 10 players every week ......take off your Salary Sombrero and we will give you 13 players

 

[Fade.To.Black]

He has no idea. As the team that finished first last year, a fair system requires that you receive the hardest draw this year.

That is not a fair system. A fair system requires that all teams have an equally hard draw not the most successful team gets the hardest draw. All teams should be on an equal footing and the best team wins. You are talking about a handicap system and I cant agree with that.

It would be impossible to get a dead-even draw for all teams, some will have a harder draw just by the way the comp is structured ie: not playing every team twice (once at home and once away).
@nrlsurvivor has the fairest method to accommodate this.....the top teams from the year before should have a harder draw instead of the perennial cellar-dwellers copping the rough end every season.


I disagree totally. Every season is a new season, we should not have handicapping. The NRL should be the best of the best and not influenced by handicapping. What happens to the team that wins the comp then loses its 8 best players, is that still fair? Why should a team who has invested the most money, best resources, best training, best people, best training techniques be handicapped so that an incompetent club gets a hand up?

It should be as even a playing field as possible. I agree with you that unless all clubs play each other twice, the draw cant be completely fair, but to intentionally make it unfair is wrong. IMO the system the NRL used prior to COVID where the results of the previous system were split into two pools was the fairest, so 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 were in one pool and all played each other twice and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 were in the other and played each other twice. That is as fair as it can be. Equality, not equity.

"The team that has invested the most money"......aren't all clubs restricted by the salary cap on their spending? As is widely suspected, teams that spend the most money are most than likely paying star players outside of the allowed cap with "extras". Should they be rewarded for that? Look at professional sports where there is a player draft in place, the team that finishes last gets the 1st draft pick and so-on up the ladder in reverse. Doing things this way gives the best chance of a closer comp.
Or we can just go the way of the EPL where only 3 or 4 clubs are capable of competing realistically for the title every year. I know which comp version I would rather watch.

Clubs spend money on more than players, training staff, equipment, facilities, juniors, junior facilities, junior coaching, coaching staff, training of staff. Clubs that invest in these things and run a good ship should be rewarded, not handicapped. Why should a club that does these things well be handicapped and club that is run ineptly benefitted?

Also under the handicap system that you suggest you would have teams tanking and racing to the bottom from 6 weeks out.

So what kind of comp would I like to watch? A comp where teams are penalised for success, where teams are rewarded for mediocrity and poor performance, where teams are tanking in a race to the bottom and potentially my team is handicapped and not given the same opportunity as others?No thanks not that comp.

Not sure handicapped is the right word....it's not like they are being asked to start a match 10-0 down on the scoreboard or playing a man short. Someone has to lose out a little in an uneven draw, this year it's the Roosters turn and they are having a monumental sook. What about WT's draw in 2018 where we had to play all the top teams straight off the bat and we're expected by many (read the post on the last page or so) to start the season 0-8. Did Pascoe have a public hissy-fit over that?
Highly doubt Roosters would be spending any money on juniors to attribute their success to. It's kept for those magical under-the-table gifts.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

He has no idea. As the team that finished first last year, a fair system requires that you receive the hardest draw this year.

That is not a fair system. A fair system requires that all teams have an equally hard draw not the most successful team gets the hardest draw. All teams should be on an equal footing and the best team wins. You are talking about a handicap system and I cant agree with that.

It would be impossible to get a dead-even draw for all teams, some will have a harder draw just by the way the comp is structured ie: not playing every team twice (once at home and once away).
@nrlsurvivor has the fairest method to accommodate this.....the top teams from the year before should have a harder draw instead of the perennial cellar-dwellers copping the rough end every season.


I disagree totally. Every season is a new season, we should not have handicapping. The NRL should be the best of the best and not influenced by handicapping. What happens to the team that wins the comp then loses its 8 best players, is that still fair? Why should a team who has invested the most money, best resources, best training, best people, best training techniques be handicapped so that an incompetent club gets a hand up?

It should be as even a playing field as possible. I agree with you that unless all clubs play each other twice, the draw cant be completely fair, but to intentionally make it unfair is wrong. IMO the system the NRL used prior to COVID where the results of the previous system were split into two pools was the fairest, so 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 were in one pool and all played each other twice and 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 were in the other and played each other twice. That is as fair as it can be. Equality, not equity.

Only way for it to be truly equal is that everyone play each other twice, once at home and once away.

 

[supercoach]

I actually agree with Uncle Nick, or at least some of it. The draw, or should I say schedule of matches was basically put together by the broadcasters and this was payback for jumping onboard project Apollo (the season restart).

For me I am not concerned who we play, you just have to win matches to make the finals and to be the best you have to be able to beat the best. What Iam concerned about is when we play and what time we play. As that has a big bearing on your revenue streams. If your like the Bronks and get a 7.30pm time slot every Thursday or preferably Friday your a much more attractive proposition to a sponsor than a team that gets the 6.30pm time slot on a Sunday. The Raiders, last year grand finalists get only 3 free to air time slots because they don’t rate high enough. To me that is b/s, they earned the right on last years effort to be rewarded with more free to air games.

Anyway nothing has changed, the broadcasters are still pulling all the strings when it comes to the draw. Level playing field goes out the window once again

 

[Elderslie_Tiger]

This year the league the has broken new ground which unfortunately was forced upon them by Covid 19 what is stopping them from next year each team playing each other twice start the season a week or two earlier and finish the comp around the same time as this this year I'm sure they could squeeze SOO on stand alone weekends which would give teams a 3 week break through the season